"Sentia are you saying that you beleive the directors went in to this drill on the grounds they pay if there is no oil and they miss out if there is oil?"
Sorry yatchy I have been out for a while and have just got back to the computer.
No I am not saying that.
What I am saying is that presumably the directors (on the basis of the information that we have at our disposal so far)entered into this agreement to farmin for 15% in the hope that PetroVietnam would not want to exert its backin rights if anything substantial was found.
Now I would presume that if PPP has made payment to Premier and met its costs as arranged (though that step may have depended on PPP getting Vietnam Government approval) ,..... but assume that PPP has made some or all of the agreed payment, then as PetroVietnam is now going to exercise its pre-emptive right to backin then PPP's money should be returned to it because PV is now taking up that 15% or some portion of it.
I would presume that if PPP has paid over money as required then , if PV takes over all the 15% then PPP should get all its money back (in theory). If PV is going to take just a portion of the 15% (say 10%) then if PPP has paid money over then it should get back the amount equivalent to that 10%.
At least according to me.
So I would assume that it was a gamble with a safety element to it (I would hope). If not then we really are the creek without a paddle and Mr Prudence need to change his name by deed poll to Dangerfield !!!!!!!
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?